Author
Topic: Is the three bar cross used in Eastern Orthodoxy but not Oriental Orthodoxy? (Read 19047 times)

I would really like a piece of Orthodox jewelry to remind me of my journey, and I have found the three bar cross. However, I was wondering if this was only used in Eastern Orthodoxy (I'm converting to Oriental Orthodoxy).

I've never seen the three bar cross used by the Oriental Orthodox. It's a beautiful cross, but it's just not a part of our tradition.

You might want to contact Festal Creations and ask them to send you catalogues and flyers of their Oriental Orthodox crosses and other jewelry. The phone number is (866)455-ICON(4266). You can also e-mail them at festalc@juno.com. They have a website, mostly with their Eastern Orthodox items, at http://www.festalcreations.com/

The owners are Eastern Orthodox, but they have OO items also, mostly Armenian and Coptic. The prices are very reasonable.

It's a Slavic Orthodox thing (Russian, Serbian, Ukrainian, etc.). It is sometimes used by Greeks and Arabs in the "Eastern" Orthodox Church, but it is not a part of their historical patrimonies, at least originally. The "Orientals" don't use it at all.

These days I think Greeks might use it on their schema monks, but I think that's about it.

It is not used on a collective level by any of the OO churches, as far as I know.

That doesn't necessarily mean that there would be a problem with you individually using it, however, if you take a liking to it.

Like deusveritasest said, no OO church uses it officially, however, there's no problem with them as the significance of the three bars is not limited by OO/EO differences. At a retreat I went to last year, my bishop, Bishop David, handed out small three bar Russian Orthodox Crosses with the engraving "Save and Protect" on the back (in Russian of course) to everyone present, and there was no problem at all. I'm OO but I have a large three bar Russian Orthodox cross hanging from my rear view mirror along with a Coptic cross and I see no problem; then again, I'm sure someone out there believes I'm one of those heretical ecumenicists who's trying to promote some sort of Orthodox "Unity." Anyway, I'd probably recommend picking a cross that'll remind you of your journey and will travel with you during it. If I may ask, which denomination of OO are you converting to?

Logged

"A dog is better than I am, for he has love and he does not judge." - Abba Xanthios

I have been attending a wonderful Syriac Orthdox church where I live, and I hope very much to be Chrismated next year. I have been to the divine liturgy three times and on Wednesday I am going to talk to the priest about my wishes to convert. A parishioner introduced me to him after church my first time and told him but he and I haven't spoken one-on-one about it.

Wish me luck, I love this church!

I'm keeping a journal of my journey, and I know I'm going to love looking back on it. I knew after my first visit to the church that I had found something special and knew that I should write about it from day one.

Anyway, I'd probably recommend picking a cross that'll remind you of your journey and will travel with you during it.

I looked at the Coptic cross and I think it is absolutely beautiful. I wanted to ask you, since you are a Copt, if you would think it fine for me to wear that one? I thought it would be more fitting for me than the three bar cross, since the Coptic cross would at least be from the Oriental Orthodox family like my denomination.

It doesn't appear to be an issue of what is acceptable here. I think most OO would find it acceptable for you to wear the three bar cross, especially given that its symbology appears to be consistent with OOy. But it is significant that it is from a non-OO tradition. It's really thus a matter of proximity to your own liturgical tradition. The Slavic cross is furthest away because of being from a different historical communion. The Coptic cross is closer because it is from the same historical communion, but from a different liturgical tradition. If you really wanted to stick to your own liturgical tradition you should get a West Syrian cross. But like I said, it's not a matter of "acceptable" so much as probably what distance from your own liturgical tradition you are comfortable with.

I looked at the Coptic cross and I think it is absolutely beautiful. I wanted to ask you, since you are a Copt, if you would think it fine for me to wear that one? I thought it would be more fitting for me than the three bar cross, since the Coptic cross would at least be from the Oriental Orthodox family like my denomination.

There's no problem in wearing a Coptic cross, and I do agree they are quite beautiful but pick a cross that first catches your heart, then your eyes. Like deusveritasest also said, Coptic would be closer to your faith, but so would a Syriac cross, but if you're not concerned with distancing yourself a bit from your own liturgical tradition, then borrowing from the overall Orthodox Church's (EO/OO) tradition is no problem.

Logged

"A dog is better than I am, for he has love and he does not judge." - Abba Xanthios

If you really wanted to stick to your own liturgical tradition you should get a West Syrian cross. But like I said, it's not a matter of "acceptable" so much as probably what distance from your own liturgical tradition you are comfortable with.

Thank you so much! I had no idea that there was a West Syrian cross.

I love all of the Orthodox crosses, but I think I'd like to buy a specifically Syrian one for the time being because I feel such a bond with my church and the people there it would especially have a lot of meaning to me

is essentially the modern cross of the West Syrian rite Oriental Orthodox churches (Syriac Orthodox Church, Jacobite Syrian Christian Church, and Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church), that one will find on the churches' altars, curtains, and vestments:

That looks more like a Greek cross to me than a West Assyrian one. Am I mistaken?

That cross and other variants of that style can be found on many of the ancient Coptic monasteries so it could either be an early Greek style or a Coptic one. In this image that cross can be seen in the Ankh so it does seem to have some ancient Egyptian roots:

I'm not really sure how to answer your question, but, if we're talking about the Coptic Cross that's my avatar and the images above of the crosses carved into the walls, I'd guess they weren't designed for crucifixions but to remind us of the ultimate crucifixion and add on more symbolism. They take the form of a cross (equilateral sides) but add on to it; for example, the one in my avatar has the three points on each side symbolizing the 12 disciples which went out to all the parts of the world (hence the points face all the directions). I'm sure there's different symbolism for other types of crosses which others know more about.

Logged

"A dog is better than I am, for he has love and he does not judge." - Abba Xanthios

I'm not really sure how to answer your question, but, if we're talking about the Coptic Cross that's my avatar and the images above of the crosses carved into the walls, I'd guess they weren't designed for crucifixions but to remind us of the ultimate crucifixion and add on more symbolism. They take the form of a cross (equilateral sides) but add on to it; for example, the one in my avatar has the three points on each side symbolizing the 12 disciples which went out to all the parts of the world (hence the points face all the directions). I'm sure there's different symbolism for other types of crosses which others know more about.

Okay, thats definitely a plausable explanation, I thank you for taking the time to enlighten me.

Hey this would probably be the best place to ask this, I am seriously considering converting to Orthodoxy i have been attending a Greek church atm but trying to visit this Coptic one near by, If i convert it will probably be into the British orthodox church i have connected with them and really enjoy the ones i have met with. Inspired by the BOC i decided i would make my own cross the BOC respects thier Coptic counterparts very much so i tried to blend a Coptic and celtic Cross.. Would this be a problem with some churches? on the back is Lord have mercy in Irish Gaeilge... im considering putting some Knotwork on it but id like to see if this could be an issue of altering a traditional cross.

Hey this would probably be the best place to ask this, I am seriously considering converting to Orthodoxy i have been attending a Greek church atm but trying to visit this Coptic one near by, If i convert it will probably be into the British orthodox church.

well I personally agree with their take on the nature of Christ, I understand essentially both churched are saying the same thing and its just semantics. However I don't believe that the person of Christ should be separated, that His person is both fully human and fully divine. I still am trying to study more on the difference I'm a student in a protestant school of ministry, so I don't have much money to buy books. I'm hoping I can use the internet and experience both churches to find the other differences.

However I don't believe that the person of Christ should be separated, that His person is both fully human and fully divine.

That's not what the Orthodox Church teaches. We teach that Christ is one person or hypostasis in two natures, which are divine and human. He has a divine nature and a human nature. He unites our humanity to divinity, that we might be made divine.

The Miaphysites (the Oriental communion) teach that Christ is one person or hypostasis in one nature, which is the Logos or Word.

There are about a thousand threads on this board about this very issue, but you should be aware that not everyone thinks this is "mere semantics." Semantics matter, and plenty of people on both sides consider us to be very different churches. I honestly don't know how I feel about everything at this point, having been pulled in both directions by different people that I respect.

Hey this would probably be the best place to ask this, I am seriously considering converting to Orthodoxy i have been attending a Greek church atm but trying to visit this Coptic one near by, If i convert it will probably be into the British orthodox church i have connected with them and really enjoy the ones i have met with. Inspired by the BOC i decided i would make my own cross the BOC respects thier Coptic counterparts very much so i tried to blend a Coptic and celtic Cross.. Would this be a problem with some churches? on the back is Lord have mercy in Irish Gaeilge... im considering putting some Knotwork on it but id like to see if this could be an issue of altering a traditional cross.

well I personally agree with their take on the nature of Christ, I understand essentially both churched are saying the same thing and its just semantics. However I don't believe that the person of Christ should be separated, that His person is both fully human and fully divine.

Ah...

If they are actually "saying the same thing", then why should the latter sentence be a concern between the two?

The Armenian cross is floral and symbolizes the tree of life. Because through the cross of the Lord we were given life. Each of the wings of the Armenian cross is ended in two divided parts of which each has three buds.

The Miaphysites (the Oriental communion) teach that Christ is one person or hypostasis in one nature, which is the Logos or Word.

This is NOT a correct explanation of what the Miaphysites believe and teach. What you have written is more like the Eutichean monophysitism which is NOT the faith of the Oriental Orthodox Church.

The implications of Alveus Lacuna's statement are unclear given the way it has been grammatically structured. If the final clause is intended to qualify the words "one person or hypostasis" then the statement is generally an accurate representation of Miaphysite Orthodoxy. If it is intended, however, to qualify "one nature", then it is not.

Logged

No longer an active member of this forum. Sincerest apologies to anyone who has taken offence to anything posted in youthful ignorance or negligence prior to my leaving this forum - October, 2012.

"Philosophy is the imitation by a man of what is better, according to what is possible" - St Severus

The Miaphysites (the Oriental communion) teach that Christ is one person or hypostasis in one nature, which is the Logos or Word.

This is NOT a correct explanation of what the Miaphysites believe and teach. What you have written is more like the Eutichean monophysitism which is NOT the faith of the Oriental Orthodox Church.

The implications of Alveus Lacuna's statement are unclear given the way it has been grammatically structured. If the final clause is intended to qualify the words "one person or hypostasis" then the statement is generally an accurate representation of Miaphysite Orthodoxy. If it is intended, however, to qualify "one nature", then it is not.

Well, in both cases his explanation is incorrect. If he mentions the "one nature" without adding anything that would explain what he means by that "one nature" (like "of the Incarnate Word" or "one Theandric nature" or so), that is he doesn't mention in any way the human "side" of the Lord or His incarnate state, and in that same sentence he only mentions the Lord's divine "side" (whether it's His person or nature or I don't know what else), it is very natural to conclude that he represents the Eutichean Christology.

Of course qualifying it further in such a way brings greater clarity to what is intended by us. I guess because, as far as I recall, Alveus seems to have had a rather charitable approach to understanding OO Christology in past discussions where the subject has arisen, I was inclined to assume that he had implied that the One Nature that we confess pertained to the Incarnate Word, and was not seeking in any way to suggest that by "one nature" we refer simply to the Divine Nature.

St Cyril doesn't disavow the expression "one nature" unqalified per se; after all, the quotation provided has him saying directly, "he displayed to us one nature". The subsequent clause serves as a clarification, which seems to have received due emphasis in this context since he was addressing OO Christology as against what those who "twist the facts" say.

« Last Edit: September 11, 2010, 07:34:06 AM by EkhristosAnesti »

Logged

No longer an active member of this forum. Sincerest apologies to anyone who has taken offence to anything posted in youthful ignorance or negligence prior to my leaving this forum - October, 2012.

"Philosophy is the imitation by a man of what is better, according to what is possible" - St Severus

Hey this would probably be the best place to ask this, I am seriously considering converting to Orthodoxy i have been attending a Greek church atm but trying to visit this Coptic one near by, If i convert it will probably be into the British orthodox church i have connected with them and really enjoy the ones i have met with. Inspired by the BOC i decided i would make my own cross the BOC respects thier Coptic counterparts very much so i tried to blend a Coptic and celtic Cross.. Would this be a problem with some churches? on the back is Lord have mercy in Irish Gaeilge... im considering putting some Knotwork on it but id like to see if this could be an issue of altering a traditional cross.

It is a pretty cool idea.

so it wouldn't come as offensive to Copts?And I would like to apologize for engaging a side topic within a topic I didn't realize it until the second post and now a lot of others have added to that subject. So, sorry to everyone...

The Miaphysites (the Oriental communion) teach that Christ is one person or hypostasis in one nature, which is the Logos or Word.

This is NOT a correct explanation of what the Miaphysites believe and teach. What you have written is more like the Eutichean monophysitism which is NOT the faith of the Oriental Orthodox Church.

The implications of Alveus Lacuna's statement are unclear given the way it has been grammatically structured. If the final clause is intended to qualify the words "one person or hypostasis" then the statement is generally an accurate representation of Miaphysite Orthodoxy. If it is intended, however, to qualify "one nature", then it is not.

Of course qualifying it further in such a way brings greater clarity to what is intended by us. I guess because, as far as I recall, Alveus seems to have had a rather charitable approach to understanding OO Christology in past discussions where the subject has arisen, I was inclined to assume that he had implied that the One Nature that we confess pertained to the Incarnate Word, and was not seeking in any way to suggest that by "one nature" we refer simply to the Divine Nature.

St Cyril doesn't disavow the expression "one nature" unqalified per se; after all, the quotation provided has him saying directly, "he displayed to us one nature". The subsequent clause serves as a clarification, which seems to have received due emphasis in this context since he was addressing OO Christology as against what those who "twist the facts" say.

You're confusing me. In the last post I commented on your seemed to disavow "one nature" as reflecting OOy and now it seems you are saying that it does indeed reflect OOy.

That looks more like a Greek cross to me than a West Assyrian one. Am I mistaken?

That cross and other variants of that style can be found on many of the ancient Coptic monasteries so it could either be an early Greek style or a Coptic one. In this image that cross can be seen in the Ankh so it does seem to have some ancient Egyptian roots:

Sorry to resurrect this thread but weren't those crosses found on many Ancient Egyptian temples because the early Egyptians Christians were hiding form their Roman oppressors in the ancient Tombs? I know I have seen many of these types before in Egypt.